Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

The Columbine Syndrome

Judith Warner has written an Op-Ed for The Times that appears in print and online on Tuesday. Post a comment about it below. — The Editors

Have you followed the series of articles in The Times about Joshua Komisarjevsky, the Cheshire, Conn., 26-year-old who, on early parole for a long string of late-night home robberies, teamed up with an accomplice and broke into a nearby house, sexually assaulted a woman and at least one of her young daughters, beat the father with a baseball bat and left them all to die in a fire? (The father alone survived.)

Buried in a report on Tuesday was a sinister detail that piled on a broad insult to all the gruesome injuries, victimizing a whole new set of people who should have had no link whatsoever with Komisarjevsky’s crimes. Read the Column >>

I feel that there is a lot of prejudice against children who are not “normal”. My daughter has ADD.
I made the mistake of being up front about it. I am in medicine, I view it as a medical issue and nothing to be ashamed of. In addition to that, I felt if I hid it, I was giving the message to my daughter that it was something to be ashamed of. Now, I keep my mouth shut. I don’t tell anyone. I think (and I feel very guilty about this) that my honesty about this has hurt her, socially, in big ways. I think I made a huge error in assuming that people would not judge her (not to mention us!) over this diagnosis.
The thing that really fries me about this is that she spent her first year in an orphanage. You would think that people would have the compassion to realize that it might take a child, under these circumstances, to get caught up and organized in life. So, the whole thing has really disappointed me in human beings, generally, and their petty fears.

Public misperceptions about children with ADHD are definitely harmful. That people so misunderstand the disorder indicates a serious lack of knowledge about it. Even popular columnist and psychologist Dr. Joyce Brothers has helped perpetuate myths about ADHD. The best things that those who think people with ADHD are dangerous can do are to (1) talk to laypeople like me (editormom @ kokedit.com), who have family members with ADHD, and (2) read the fact sheets available online from CHADD (Children and Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder).

The family issue that struck me about this case wasn’t ADHD but adoption. Did you note how Komisarjevsky’s uncle, a former executive at a PR firm, was quick to issue a press release pointing out that his nephew had been adopted? As if to say, “Don’t blame *our* (illustrious) genes. Or our family’s parenting abilities. This homicidal stuff must come from those strange, foreign genes.” As if to say, “This young man isn’t *really* part of our family.” It effectively disowned him.

I grew up with adopted cousins, and it always bothered me that my father refused to consider them to be “really” part of our family. He wouldn’t even refer to them as his niece and nephew, and if I referred to one of them as my cousin (which I would do without thinking about it, because that’s what they felt like to me, not to bug him), he would be puzzled about who I was talking about, and then say something like, “Oh, you mean [name].” Not even “your adopted cousins.” To be fair to him, they were adopted relatively late, when they were 7 and 8 years old. But a number of my friends have adopted infants, and based on things he’s said regarding them, I’m not sure he would’ve felt and acted differently had my cousins been adopted as infants.

I’ve been riveted by this case, partly because I grew up and now live near Cheshire, and, partly because I grew up in a Federal-style house similar to the Komisarjevsky home (and which has recently, thanks to my parents’ old age coupled with their lifelong disinclination to spend money, become somewhat dilapidated), I identify to a certain extent with the Komisarjevsky family. From the family’s point of view, I think Joshua Komisarjevsky’s alleged actions must be utterly bewildering.

It’s sheer speculation, of course, but from the look of things right now, I think it may emerge that he’s a “psychopath” — by which I mean someone who lacks empathy and a conscience, has a low response to stimuli and (perhaps as a result) seeks out thrills and excitement. And who, for example, as a child or teenager engaged in those hallmark incidents involving cruelty to animals.

From what I’ve read in the past, there’s a fundamental disagreement over what causes “psychopathy”/”antisocial personality disorder.” Some experts, such as Dr. Robert Hare, favor the term “psychopathy” (for the specific kind of personality I just described, not the “mobster” type, or “juvenile delinquent” type, which are considered to be in different categories) and believe there’s a biological or genetic component. Others (including the APA) prefer the term “sociopathic personality disorder” for both the specific personality type I described and for mobsters and juvenile delinquents; believe that all these personality types are due to social influences; and believe that deciding whether someone lacks empathy or a conscience is “too subjective” to be a basis for scientific labeling. (And then they rather arrogantly (imho) call the term “psychopath” obsolete). Some infamous criminal psychopaths were abused (sexually, physically or emotionally) as kids, but others had unremarkable childhoods, and of course the vast majority of abused kids don’t grow up to be psychopaths at all, much less criminal ones.

Just based on reading the news, I think there must be a biological component, although not necessarily a genetic one (even though I believe a couple of studies found a genetic link for the conscience-free type a few years ago). It doesn’t seem to run in families, but rather, at least sometimes, to pop up out of the blue.

In any event, perhaps I’m too “loyal,” but I think that even if one’s relative is a criminal and/or psychopath, they’re still your relative. The Unabomber’s family, for example, has handled his crimes differently. To be sure, David Kazinsky turned Ted in to the authorities; ethically, he had no choice, and if I were ever unfortunate enough to be in such a position I hope I would have the courage to do the same. But as I recall the family has taken the position that Ted is mentally ill, they’ve tried to show him compassion, and they haven’t disowned him.

Perhaps I’m also too idealistic, but I’d like to think that the family of adopted kids could still recognize them as family even if they commit brutal and bewildering crimes, following the model of the Unabomber’s family.

Hooray for Judith Warner! I’m a lawyer, and I’ve always thought I was pretty smart. I’ve never had anything but contempt for the Twinkie Defense and its many permutations, now including ADHD. I’ve felt that either people know right from wrong or they don’t, and that Twinkie-induced weakness is no different from any other character failing (and therefore no defense to anything).

But Judith Warner has now given words to the real reason for rejecting crybaby excuses for evil — if ADHD or brutal parents or Twinkies require verdicts of “not guilty,” then everyone with ADHD, or brutal parents, or too many Twinkies is necessarily a bad person. Either ADHD causes evil or it doesn’t; if it doesn’t, then it’s no defense).

Given the popularity of obesity in America, the Twinkie defense almost requires acquittal of any defendant with a BMI over 29.9 — and an irrebuttable presumption that anyone that fat is a criminal.

A good piece by Ms. Warner but she missed out on a couple of facts that would strengthen her argument. Research has found that 54% of kids whose ADHD is untreated or not treated successfully end up becoming antisocially oriented teens. Other research has found that 55% of these kids begin to abuse alcohol or drugs as teens. Ie, if left alone these kids become much more troubled and much more prone to illegal and violent behavior. As a psychologist who evaluates teens on juvenile probation whose ADHD, and other problems, were not successfully dealt with when they were younger because of the prejudice or ignorance of their own parents I see these troubled, and sometimes dangerous, teens all the time. Ie, we can pay for helping these kids when they are younger or we can pay, oftentimes much more, for prosecuting them and protecting us against them when they are older.

To Janet,
I understand your desire for honest communication about your daughter’s problems with your daughter’s friends or at least their parents. I don’t totally understand your expectations that her friends will have the compassion or ability to accept or manage her behavior. I don’t know what age level you’re talking about, but instead of saying your child has ADD, you might tell parents particular problems your child may exhibit and give them tips about how to help their child handle a difficult situation if it arizes. I have young children and it’s much easier when a parent, and it doesn’t just have to be the parent of a child with “special needs” can be open about troubles her child has in getting along with others. You might endender a more compassionate response in others if you offer a little compassion about how it may not be that easy to play with your child, rather than just telling a family about the diagnosis and expecting them to be very compassionate.

While I agree with the basic premise of your column, I think that this issue is currently muddled by recent examinations into the world of child diagnoses such as ADHD and personality disorders as they relate to the often disingenuous objectives of prescribing doctors and pharmaceutical companies. The NY Times just had a revealing article about this very topic and one cannot help but wonder how many of these children truly have the “disorder” that they have been diagnosed with, and many articles have been written about the adverse effects of the (perhaps unneccesary) drugs some of these kids are given. While it is a “brave new world” of diagnosis, I’m not sure that I feel comfortable with all the “syndromes” and “disorders” that have become so integral to childhood. I think the issues related to your point of social acceptance are far more complicated than this article acknowledges. Politics, business, poverty, social expectations, education and standardized testing all play a role in the medical diagnoses of children.

Complain about us, disdain us, think what you will. But, when society has needed risk takers to kill the bear, destroy the enemy machine gun nest, or invent the newest technology, those of us with ADHD have often saved the day. You may find us difficult, mouthy, restless, and a veritable pain in the neck, but we find you boring. You talk slow, walk slow and think slow. You drone on in class and drive us crazy–get to the point! What’s the bottom line? Evolution would have eliminated us long ago if we served no purpose. As the societies’ hunters and adventurers, we’ve nourished humanity and saved it from it’s boring, risk averse self.

Dear Judith-
Re. your op-ed on Sunday..
Writing as a child clinical psychologist and faculty member at Rutgers University, I would like to point out an inconsistency and slight corrective in your excellent column. You mention that parents are too lazy to discpline their badly behaved kids and prefer instead to medicate them into compliance. Later, you mention that ADHD kids need help because, untreated, they are likely to be facing a lifetime of frustration and unhappiness.

ADHD is woefully overdiagnosed. When it is correctly identified, medication is the treatment of choice. It is extremely difficult, and beyond the capacity of most parents and educators, to provide the degree of structure and consistency required for their children across many settings and over many years for ADHD symptoms to be ameliorated. What the medication is designed to do is to help children be amenable to “normal” parenting and interaction in their environment. To be medicated into compliance is to be overmedicated… another too-frequent problem. Even in your final paragraph, you suggest that Komisarjevsky’s parents’ error was to not allow him to be medicated. This may well be true.

Whether a child is one with ADHD and on medication or simply oppositional, difficult, etc., it is true that many parents are not skilled enough, persistent enough, mature enough, and/or knowledgeable enough to parent them properly. This is why the social safety net afforded by the school and varied school professionals and pediatricians and family practice doctors, in particular, is so important. It has always been true, in history, that it takes a village to raise a child. It is even more so today, in our hectic, fragmented, advertising-saturated culture.

The idea that parents are looking to the ADHD diagnosis as an excuse for lazy parenting makes me furious. Each and every time I have to dispense Ritalin for my son, I feel sick to my stomach. I hate the idea that I am putting this into my child’s body every day; the cumulative side effects can be very serious, and include a tendency to become suicidal as a teenager. Yet the teachers and administrators at my school act like they want to call social services if I even try to mention that I would prefer not to give it to him; after all it makes their job that much easier, even though they word their arguments in terms of my son’s potential to become a lifelong failure if he doesn’t take it.

I also had naively assumed that other parents would understand about my son’s ADHD. I told some people, if the situation or moment seemed appropriate to disclose it. I certainly wasn’t hiding it, or ashamed of it. One day, there was a turning point for me, though. My seven year old son was having a particularly hard day, and instead of focusing on the game, he had been trying to interest the other boys waiting on the sideline in some other game he had made up with the soccer ball. I was cringing inside, and as soon as he came off the field, I explained to him that it wasn’t appropriate behavior.

Well, as we walked back to the car behind the coach and his son, who is in my son’s class, I heard the boy say to his father “I don’t like that kid, something is wrong with him, he’s a psycho.” I waited for the father to correct the kid. To say something like, “Well, you don’t have to be friends with everybody, but we talk respectfully about all our teammates.” Instead he replied (I guess obviously frustrated with the distraction of keeping Ryan in line while trying to coach) “I don’t know what’s wrong with him; – something – he’s probably retarded or something.” My son clearly heard this man say this, and he looked up at me, completely stricken. It was the last game of the season, and I didn’t sign him up for any more team sports.

I feel bad for doing that instead of fighting for him. I should have talked to the coach or the league about the comment, or asked if I could give an educational talk on ADHD for the league. Instead I just took him out of an activity he enjoyed. But quite honestly, I was too tired from fighting for him in his other venues – such as religious instruction, and his main classroom.

Yet, may I also brag that my son was the first child in his school this year to win a YES award (for respecting Yourself, Each other and your School)? He saw a child who was new to the school crying over seperation anxiety. So instead of using the money we had given him for the school book fair on himself, he bought this child a small toy and a book.

Does this sound like a child who is plotting elaborate, violent schemes? My hope is that this is the sweet part of his spirit that will prevail his whole life, and that it won’t be worn down by the comments of ignorant, inconsiderate people like that soccer coach.

Learning disabilities are not mental illness – you are certainly correct with that, and it is shameful that the attorneys tried to use it as a ‘defense’ for this heinous crime. However, your remark, “kids’ mental illness and eventual mass murder have been linked in the public mind” is astonishing – how is Columbine *not* a result of mental illness? Did it seem sane, in any sense of the word, to you?? Please, don’t throw babies out with bathwater while decrying the same.

Let us first get right what we can put aside – and what not:
ADHD – a) it is over-diagnosed, an easy excuse for parental and educational incompetence; also a good marketing for the pharma-industry.
b) it mostly concerns boys. Why? Because they have not much personal and inspiring contact in our “feminized” schools. When we look at Carol Gilligan’s old hats of a “chilling climate” for girls in our schools, we have to wonder if she can recognize who’s a girl and who’s a boy, because the chill has become icy for the boys when they are brought up by 90% female teachers. They would have less trouble (and so would we) if they were less father- and teacherless.
“Outsourcing” our children’s training. And here should be our real concern: Yes, all this may contribute to them being thrown out of balance -also into autism and general asocialism. But who is at fault? Are they the monsters we fear? Or do we create them? (maybe deliberately? I wouldn’t be surprised – listening to NOW et al.) Whatever: it would not be ADHD that creates them. As for the young Kommissar (how did name that get to him? a touch of Stalin in the family – biol. or adopt.?) – look at the place he was trained:
Prison: an Academy of Crime – instead of teaching him a bit about chances in real life. Sending children or young people there is providing professional training – not of the “lone ranger” but the “isolated wreck”.
And as for the “Colombine Syndrome” – we are, again, misdirected to seeing only “the boys” in it. I recall that, when I first heard the Boomtown Rats’ top hit “Tell me why! – I don’t like Mondays”, it referred to the first such school slaughter, but the one who explained that shooting spree was a girl. Again, this is one of those deliberate tricks of vilifying only on side of our species.
One big problem we will have if we continue that way is that we neglect the fact that circumstances are very important factors in the deviation of human minds. These things are mostly opportunistic and, so far, yes, the males had more oportunities and temptation. But that is changing, and female prison population is increasing at twice the speed of the male one. Don’t forget: Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo were not little accidents but logical consequences of “empowerment”.
It is that world of misdirections, now strongly promoted in sub-cultures, films, and media which we have to watch – and change! For: if we don’t, we may find that our “liberation” has turned out just as wonderful as the one we exported to Iraq. And that is bad for us all.
Dr. Joan Boost

The demonisation of the mentally ill (and mentally retarded — amazingly, many people still don’t distinguish; e.g., the coach and his son in #10) is an old canard. Most mentally ill people are dangerous to no one but, possibly, themselves; if anything, the “normals” are dangerous to them. The mentally ill and mentally retarded are far more likely to be victims of crimes than perpertrators. The comment by Joan Marie at #11 makes me cringe.

Similarly, there really are parents who hide their bad parenting behind ADD diagnoses when the true diagnosis for the kid is “brat.” And now that there is no asterisk to differentiate special-needs SAT scores from standard testing methods, there are parents who actively seek these diagnoses in the hope that getting an extra hour for the kid to take the test will boost his score enough to make an average-intelligence kid look like a bright one.

Joan Marie and Judith, “learning disabilities are not mental illness; you are certainly correct with that.” But learning disabilities and mental illness are not sociopathy, either. I have, alas, known a sociopath or two; trust me, they are scarily sane. They know the difference between good and evil; they just don’t care.

Ian Gilbert at #4: “Either ADHD causes evil or it doesn’t”? Many factors interact to make up a personality, nature, nurture, chance. It could be a contributing factor in a nexus of circumstances, including free will.

to Kathy R. luckily, my daughter does not misbehave. She is inattentive. She is a little immature for her age. That’s all. So, you can see why I feel people could be more compassionate on her behalf. If I see a child struggling (or anyone for that matter) I teach our daughter that we try to be kind and accepting towards people who are different or under stress.

*You* may not be a lazy parent medicating their child because they are challenging; but there are plenty of others out there who will. I used to work in a pharmacy, in a somewhat affluent area, where parents would call in and ask the pharmacist, “What can I give my kid to shut them up for a while?” or “how much benadryl can I give my kid before they OD?” Those are almost exact quotes. The pharmacist, of course, always refused to answer such inquiries.

There are plenty of parents who are too lazy or just incapable of dealing with their children (who were just another accessory anyway) who will latch on to any diagnosis so they can ‘shut them up for a while’ – hence the huge rates of overdiagnosis for these conditions.

I agree with much in this column but must admit that I have seen some teens with ADD and ADHD have difficulty with impulse control and gratification delays. Of course that stuff is typical for teens anyway and may be more related to the slow maturation of certain areas of the brain rather than to a particular diagnosis. In any case, the two points that are most important here are (a)99% of the depressed teens and 99% of the ADD/ADHD teens are not dangerous and (b) some very high proportion of these teens need much more support, counseling, therapy, structure, understanding, and patience than is typically available.

The problem with science is that direct correlation does not impy cauality. At least 75 percent of scientific articles make this mistake, implying cauality… And this mistake is blasted over 500 cable channel, and the internet, even more diluted in substance.. to the point of meaningless.

In fact I’m trying to publish my latest paper, that the fly’s ears are in the wings. I cut off the winds of a hundred flies and told them to fly and they fell to the ground.

Statisically proving that the ears of the fly are in the wings.

Tonite, the botox Fox girls will tell you about this remarkable scientific finding. And to boot, a real live doctor will come on and gush over how significant this is in understanding the treatment of cancer.

I wondered at what age the young man had been adopted from Russia. We have all heard about the detachment disorder children exhibit when left to languish in an orphange without attention, love and affection. I don’t see the adhd, add, dyslexia as connected to such violence as I would see how a detachment disorder could be a part of a psycopath’s adulthood. I’m not a psychologist, but just a lay person who would definitely say this person would have to be a psycopath to do the horrible crime he is alleged to have committed. He would have to feel detached from humanity.

I, like JMB, was appalled to read that Komisarjevsky’s uncle was so quick to point out that he was adopted. The arrogance of this attitude and the tenuous connections of adopted families that it implies are mind-boggling. Certainly, any family would be devastated if a family member committed such horrific acts. But to imply that it was somehow the child’s faulty genes is to suggest that adopted children will only be loved and accepted if they are well-behaved.

I think the larger message here is that everyone involved is trying to place blame somewhere else – the family on his genes and his lawyer on his illnesses. Either way, a pathetic indictment of the society we have become.

Janet’s story about prejudice and ADD rings a bell.
If you really want to know about prejudice, try schizophrenia. As Janet did, I was open when Schiz hit us, told friends and family, the people at work and the congregants at the church where our family has worshipped for years. Our family exterienced the same consequent icey withdrawal as did Janet.
I now have a few new friends and remain defensively silent about schiz. Family still remains distant. I no longer atend church.
That is my story – one shared by legions.

I’m pretty sick of hearing that criminal behavior is excused or mitigated by a lousy unbringing, childhood “diseases” which may or may not exist, alcoholism, drug abuse, etc. So what? All of us know people who had a lousy childhood, one or more cruel parents, were in foster care, etc. No, you don’t necessarily grow up to be a criminal if you had a bad childhood. And a good childhood- a loving, affectionate family and any degree of ease-doesn’t guarantee a well-adjusted adult.

No amount of punishment will bring back the family that is gone, nor will it heal the bereaved. But do we have to listen to exculpatory tales of the bad childhood of people who just finished terminating the childhoods and adulthoods of others? Those two guys are as good an argument for the death penalty as I’ve ever seen. As a matter of fact, they are a pretty good argument for compulsory organ donation as well. Following which whatever’s left over should be thrown out with the trash.

Has Tara or any of the other apologists tried the following: bed at seven p.m.–NOT later, sugar-free diet, home-cooking (not out of boxes or pouches), no TV or video games–NONE, no after-school programs except for imaginative play with another child, regular physical exercise to tire the body ??? I’d go along with prescribed medicine only after months of such a program. The hyper-schedule, ratty food, and noisy atmosphere of most of today’s children is enough to rev up all of us. Most people who try this regimen notice a huge difference in their children–all for the better.
If both parents work, everyone is on edge. Schedules are topsy-turvy, and almost everyone is nearly frantic. Changing lifestyle is hard, but it works in many cases.

What is missing from the coverage so far…is reporters Not identifying the name of the Family Court Judge who gave the murder defendant Full custody of his daughter. More on bad reporting at //www.FamilyLawCourts.com

As usual, Judith Warner has brilliantly sifted through the scapegoating and panic and legitimate concerns to clarify the confusion and find yet another example of ignorance about children’s mental disorders.

Nobody knew more about this topic and I did:

“ADHD was over-diagnosed. ADHD was over-medicated. Criminal behavior was being blamed on ADHD. Criminal behavior was being excused by ADHD. The proliferation of the disorder was evidence of our society’s tendency to medicalize everything.”

I knew it all.

Until my daughter was born.

Because in my nine year old daughter, my beautiful lively daughter, I didn’t just get a borderline diagnosis. I didn’t get the kind of ADHD case that understandably fuels debates over whether it is real or not. My wife and I got what a pediatric neurologist described as one of the clearest and most unambiguous cases of ADHD that he had ever seen.

So much for Mr. Know-It-All.

I actually am a trained criminologist and could address the idiocy of drawing a causal link between ADHD and homicidal behavior. I won’t. It would be hard to type through the laughter.

For now, I will only use this opportunity to play my broken record yet again: ADHD is real. It is treatable. And untreated, it is a prescription for psychological, social, and personal mayhem.